Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
npx agentmods add commands/xsovad06/sova/review-prgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/xsovad06/sovaWhat it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5 | $0.00025 | $0.02367 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00013 | $0.01184 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00473 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00237 |
Grade A, and why
review-pr scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 2d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 240 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Review PR
Act as a senior engineer reviewing a teammate's pull request. Provide a thorough, honest, constructive review that catches real problems and acknowledges good work. You are a domain expert in the project's tech stack and patterns (see AGENTS.md).
# Benchmark logging (entry)
bash .claude/benchmark/log.sh "review_start" "" "" 2>/dev/null || true
CRITICAL: Complete ALL Steps. You MUST execute through Step 7 (posting the review on GitHub) before producing any final summary. Post the review directly via the GitHub API. Do NOT ask for confirmation or approval before posting. A text-only response (without a tool call) may cause the process to exit, so always post first, then summarize.
PR: $ARGUMENTS
1. Fetch PR State
Gather all PR data in parallel:
# Metadata
gh pr view <PR_NUMBER> --json title,body,author,state,additions,deletions,files,commits,reviewRequests,labels,baseRefName,headRefName,statusCheckRollup
# Full diff
gh pr diff <PR_NUMBER>
# Commits
gh api repos/<OWNER>/<REPO>/pulls/<PR_NUMBER>/commits --jq '.[] | "\(.sha) \(.commit.message)"'
# Top-level comments
gh pr view <PR_NUMBER> --json comments --jq '.comments[] | "---\n\(.author.login) (\(.createdAt)):\n\(.body)\n"'
# Inline review comments
gh api repos/<OWNER>/<REPO>/pulls/<PR_NUMBER>/comments --jq '.[] | "---\n\(.user.login) on \(.path):\(.line // .original_line) (\(.created_at)):\n\(.body)\n"'
# Reviews
gh api repos/<OWNER>/<REPO>/pulls/<PR_NUMBER>/reviews --jq '.[] | "\(.user.login) (\(.submitted_at)): \(.state)\n\(.body)\n"'
# CI checks
gh pr checks <PR_NUMBER>
Extract: author, linked issue, whether AI-generated (bot prefixes, agent comments).
CI failures do NOT block the review. If CI checks are failing, note the failures briefly in the review summary (what failed, likely cause if obvious) but proceed with the full code review. CI issues are a separate concern -- the review's job is to evaluate code quality, correctness, and design. A PR with failing CI still needs its code reviewed.
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 2d ago First seen · 240 lines · 25 tokens per session scan A 4e46b09c712a
review-pr is a command published in the GitHub repository xsovad06/sova (2 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 25 tokens to every session and 2,367 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-31.
Other commands, from other repositories
doctor
Check the health of a KARIMO installation, identify issues, and provide actionable recommendations.
run
Execute an approved PRD using feature branch workflow (v7.0). This command generates briefs, auto-reviews them, allows user iteration, and then orchestrates execution.
merge
Consolidate feature branch changes and create final PR to main. This completes the v5.0 feature branch workflow after all task PRs have been merged.
greptile-review
Execute the full Greptile review cycle on a PR, looping until score meets threshold or circuit breaker triggers.
pr-description-ja
現在のブランチの変更内容を分析し、日本語で包括的なPull Request descriptionを生成してください。.
pr-description-en
Auto-generate PR description in English from changes against base branch.